Pushpanjali Shakya, Archana Shrestha, Monish Bajracharya, Abha Shrestha, Bård Erik Kulseng, Biraj Man Karmacharya, Smriti Shrestha, Seema Das, Ishwori Byanju Shrestha, Krishnaa Barun, Nistha Shrestha, Eva Skovlund, Abhijit Sen
{"title":"基于群体的糖尿病预防教育计划(DiPEP)在糖尿病前期人群中的有效性:尼泊尔的一项随机对照试验","authors":"Pushpanjali Shakya, Archana Shrestha, Monish Bajracharya, Abha Shrestha, Bård Erik Kulseng, Biraj Man Karmacharya, Smriti Shrestha, Seema Das, Ishwori Byanju Shrestha, Krishnaa Barun, Nistha Shrestha, Eva Skovlund, Abhijit Sen","doi":"10.1136/bmjnph-2023-000702","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background Although several lifestyle intervention studies have been conducted in low/middle-income countries, there were no such studies in Nepal. Therefore, a group-based culturally tailored Diabetes Prevention Education Program (DiPEP) was conducted recently. The study aimed to evaluate the effect of DiPEP in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), weight, waist circumference, physical activity and diet among population with pre-diabetes. Method A two-arm cluster randomised controlled trial was conducted in 12 clusters of two urban areas in Nepal. The DiPEP was a 6 month intervention (four 1-hour weekly educational sessions and 5 months of follow-up by community health workers/volunteers (CHW/Vs)). A postintervention assessment was done after 6 months. Linear mixed model was used to estimate the mean difference in primary outcome (HbA1c) and secondary outcomes (weight, waist circumference, physical activity and diet) between intervention and control arms, adjusted for baseline measure. Results In intention-to-treat analysis with a total of 291 participants, the estimated mean difference in HbA1c was found to be 0.015 percentage point (95% CI −0.074 to 0.104) between the intervention arm and the control arm, while it was −0.077 (95% CI −0.152 to −0.002) among those who attended at least 3 out of 4 educational sessions. The estimated mean difference in weight (in participants who attended ≥1 educational session) was −1.6 kg (95% CI −3.1 to −0.1). A significantly lower grain consumption was found in intervention arm (−39 g/day, 95% CI −65 to −14) compared with the control arm at postintervention assessment. Conclusion Although compliance was affected by COVID-19, individuals who participated in ≥3 educational sessions had significant reduction in HbA1c and those who attended ≥1 educational session had significant weight reduction. Grain intake was significantly reduced among the intervention arm than the control arm. Hence, group-based lifestyle intervention programmes involving CHW/vs is recommended for diabetes prevention. Trial registration number NCT04074148 .","PeriodicalId":36307,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Nutrition, Prevention and Health","volume":"23 S1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effectiveness of a group-based Diabetes Prevention Education Program (DiPEP) in a population with pre-diabetes: a cluster randomised controlled trial in Nepal\",\"authors\":\"Pushpanjali Shakya, Archana Shrestha, Monish Bajracharya, Abha Shrestha, Bård Erik Kulseng, Biraj Man Karmacharya, Smriti Shrestha, Seema Das, Ishwori Byanju Shrestha, Krishnaa Barun, Nistha Shrestha, Eva Skovlund, Abhijit Sen\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/bmjnph-2023-000702\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background Although several lifestyle intervention studies have been conducted in low/middle-income countries, there were no such studies in Nepal. Therefore, a group-based culturally tailored Diabetes Prevention Education Program (DiPEP) was conducted recently. The study aimed to evaluate the effect of DiPEP in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), weight, waist circumference, physical activity and diet among population with pre-diabetes. Method A two-arm cluster randomised controlled trial was conducted in 12 clusters of two urban areas in Nepal. The DiPEP was a 6 month intervention (four 1-hour weekly educational sessions and 5 months of follow-up by community health workers/volunteers (CHW/Vs)). A postintervention assessment was done after 6 months. Linear mixed model was used to estimate the mean difference in primary outcome (HbA1c) and secondary outcomes (weight, waist circumference, physical activity and diet) between intervention and control arms, adjusted for baseline measure. Results In intention-to-treat analysis with a total of 291 participants, the estimated mean difference in HbA1c was found to be 0.015 percentage point (95% CI −0.074 to 0.104) between the intervention arm and the control arm, while it was −0.077 (95% CI −0.152 to −0.002) among those who attended at least 3 out of 4 educational sessions. The estimated mean difference in weight (in participants who attended ≥1 educational session) was −1.6 kg (95% CI −3.1 to −0.1). A significantly lower grain consumption was found in intervention arm (−39 g/day, 95% CI −65 to −14) compared with the control arm at postintervention assessment. Conclusion Although compliance was affected by COVID-19, individuals who participated in ≥3 educational sessions had significant reduction in HbA1c and those who attended ≥1 educational session had significant weight reduction. Grain intake was significantly reduced among the intervention arm than the control arm. Hence, group-based lifestyle intervention programmes involving CHW/vs is recommended for diabetes prevention. Trial registration number NCT04074148 .\",\"PeriodicalId\":36307,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMJ Nutrition, Prevention and Health\",\"volume\":\"23 S1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMJ Nutrition, Prevention and Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjnph-2023-000702\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"NUTRITION & DIETETICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Nutrition, Prevention and Health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjnph-2023-000702","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"NUTRITION & DIETETICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:虽然在中低收入国家进行了一些生活方式干预研究,但在尼泊尔没有这样的研究。因此,最近开展了一项基于群体的文化定制糖尿病预防教育计划(DiPEP)。该研究旨在评估DiPEP对糖尿病前期人群糖化血红蛋白(HbA1c)、体重、腰围、身体活动和饮食的影响。方法采用两组随机对照试验,选取尼泊尔2个城市地区的12个聚类。DiPEP是一个为期6个月的干预(4次每周1小时的教育课程和5个月的社区卫生工作者/志愿者(CHW/Vs)的随访)。6个月后进行干预后评估。采用线性混合模型估计干预组和对照组之间主要结局(HbA1c)和次要结局(体重、腰围、体力活动和饮食)的平均差异,并根据基线测量进行调整。在总共291名参与者的意向治疗分析中,干预组和对照组的HbA1c估计平均差异为0.015个百分点(95% CI - 0.074至0.104),而在至少参加了4次教育课程中的3次的患者中,HbA1c的估计平均差异为- 0.077 (95% CI - 0.152至- 0.002)。估计体重的平均差异(参加≥1次教育课程的参与者)为- 1.6 kg (95% CI为- 3.1至- 0.1)。在干预后评估中,与对照组相比,干预组的谷物消耗量显著降低(- 39 g/天,95% CI为- 65至- 14)。结论尽管依从性受到COVID-19的影响,但参加≥3次教育课程的个体HbA1c显著降低,参加≥1次教育课程的个体体重显著减轻。与对照组相比,干预组的谷物摄入量明显减少。因此,建议以群体为基础的生活方式干预方案,包括CHW/vs预防糖尿病。试验注册号NCT04074148。
Effectiveness of a group-based Diabetes Prevention Education Program (DiPEP) in a population with pre-diabetes: a cluster randomised controlled trial in Nepal
Background Although several lifestyle intervention studies have been conducted in low/middle-income countries, there were no such studies in Nepal. Therefore, a group-based culturally tailored Diabetes Prevention Education Program (DiPEP) was conducted recently. The study aimed to evaluate the effect of DiPEP in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), weight, waist circumference, physical activity and diet among population with pre-diabetes. Method A two-arm cluster randomised controlled trial was conducted in 12 clusters of two urban areas in Nepal. The DiPEP was a 6 month intervention (four 1-hour weekly educational sessions and 5 months of follow-up by community health workers/volunteers (CHW/Vs)). A postintervention assessment was done after 6 months. Linear mixed model was used to estimate the mean difference in primary outcome (HbA1c) and secondary outcomes (weight, waist circumference, physical activity and diet) between intervention and control arms, adjusted for baseline measure. Results In intention-to-treat analysis with a total of 291 participants, the estimated mean difference in HbA1c was found to be 0.015 percentage point (95% CI −0.074 to 0.104) between the intervention arm and the control arm, while it was −0.077 (95% CI −0.152 to −0.002) among those who attended at least 3 out of 4 educational sessions. The estimated mean difference in weight (in participants who attended ≥1 educational session) was −1.6 kg (95% CI −3.1 to −0.1). A significantly lower grain consumption was found in intervention arm (−39 g/day, 95% CI −65 to −14) compared with the control arm at postintervention assessment. Conclusion Although compliance was affected by COVID-19, individuals who participated in ≥3 educational sessions had significant reduction in HbA1c and those who attended ≥1 educational session had significant weight reduction. Grain intake was significantly reduced among the intervention arm than the control arm. Hence, group-based lifestyle intervention programmes involving CHW/vs is recommended for diabetes prevention. Trial registration number NCT04074148 .